Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: In the third debate, Mitt will likely go very hard against Obama on Embassy security. [View all]DreamGypsy
(2,252 posts)27. How about a response like: House proposed $5 billion cut for State Department and foreign operation
From April 25, 2012
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/04/25/house_proposes_5_billion_cut_for_state_department_and_foreign_operations
The House Appropriations Committee proposed cutting the State Department and foreign operations budget by more than $5 billion next year, in its annual allocations released Tuesday.
The Obama administration actually requested modest increases in funding for the State Department and USAID for fiscal 2013 when it released its budget request in February. While the Congress doesn't divide up the accounts the same way as the administration, in an apples-to-apples comparison, the House Appropriations Committees' allocation for State and foreign operations for fiscal 2013, $48.4 billion, would represent a 12 percent cut from the administration's $54.71 billion request for the same accounts.
The House proposed fully funding the president's $8.2 billion request for State Department funding related to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, known as the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) account. Therefore, the remainder of the funding proposed by the House, $40.1 billion for the base budget, would represent a 14 percent cut to the administration's request for non-war related diplomatic and development activities.
snip
Subcommittee ranking Democrat Nita Lowey (D-NY) criticized the cuts in her own statement to The Cable.
"I am disappointed by this short-sighted allocation and the Republicans' decision to ignore bipartisan funding levels agreed to in the Budget Control Act," she said. "We must not make cuts that fundamentally weaken our national security interests."
The Obama administration actually requested modest increases in funding for the State Department and USAID for fiscal 2013 when it released its budget request in February. While the Congress doesn't divide up the accounts the same way as the administration, in an apples-to-apples comparison, the House Appropriations Committees' allocation for State and foreign operations for fiscal 2013, $48.4 billion, would represent a 12 percent cut from the administration's $54.71 billion request for the same accounts.
The House proposed fully funding the president's $8.2 billion request for State Department funding related to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, known as the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) account. Therefore, the remainder of the funding proposed by the House, $40.1 billion for the base budget, would represent a 14 percent cut to the administration's request for non-war related diplomatic and development activities.
snip
Subcommittee ranking Democrat Nita Lowey (D-NY) criticized the cuts in her own statement to The Cable.
"I am disappointed by this short-sighted allocation and the Republicans' decision to ignore bipartisan funding levels agreed to in the Budget Control Act," she said. "We must not make cuts that fundamentally weaken our national security interests."
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
31 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
In the third debate, Mitt will likely go very hard against Obama on Embassy security. [View all]
CTyankee
Sep 2012
OP
Oops! My bad. And I even noted it on my calendar "domestic policy"! Today may not be my best day...
CTyankee
Sep 2012
#7
Oh, I knew that was what you were referring to! But I have now edited/corrected my post
CTyankee
Sep 2012
#10
Yep, mea culpa. I have edited my post accordingly...thanks for letting me know...
CTyankee
Sep 2012
#9
please correct me if wrong, but wasn't the State Department's budget slashed by...
Raster
Sep 2012
#5
Do Republicans really want to debate Americans' being attacked by Muslims? Hello, 9/11. Hello, 241
WinkyDink
Sep 2012
#12
I know, but it is the one area that worries me. If the campaign were smart (a BIG if) it would
CTyankee
Sep 2012
#15
Good response and I think Obama would say something very like that. But he should also be
CTyankee
Sep 2012
#17
It would be a precious gift, I agree. And other presidents have had similar instances...
CTyankee
Sep 2012
#20
I believe by then we will have acted on intelligence and wacked a bunch of the guys who did the deed
winstars
Sep 2012
#19
I think you are right and the third debate certainly is far enough away for something to happen
CTyankee
Sep 2012
#22
Yup. Well, I think we are just going to have to trust that this is something the campaign has
CTyankee
Sep 2012
#25
I feel they are on-the-ball professionals and I trust them. I'm sure they are working hard...
porphyrian
Sep 2012
#26